International English, American English, etc...

[rendezvouscp]

Ah, so funny. I think most Brits have a little pride in their English being the "first and only true English." Do we need a little history lesson?

Americans wanted to create a social similarity in their English that separated them from their previous foreign ruler. As such, there are different spellings and even meanings for words, depending on the English spoken. However, there are different levels of English within each country (for example, car, automobile, or vehicle?). Let's not even mention William the Conqueror and all of the French words that made it into English.

My point? C'mon, we have our different Englishes! There's no reason to make such a big deal about what is "proper" or "true" English. They both have their own reasons for being.

I agree with consistency per article, but not necessarily in the whole wiki.
-Chase

 

[thequicksilver]

Ah, so funny. I think most Brits have a little pride in their English being the "first and only true English." Do we need a little history lesson?

Did you actually read the thread? Pretty much everyone writing here has acknowledged that no matter what is used, as long as it's consistent it doesn't matter at all. Regardless of personal preference.

 

[dubbz]

"10000" would be better, as in some countries "10,000" means "ten".

How about "10 000"? IMO, that's more readable than "10000" and shouldn't cause any confusion like "10,000" vs "10.000" could.

Unless that space have some other special meaning somewhere

 

[rendezvouscp]

Did you actually read the thread? Pretty much everyone writing here has acknowledged that no matter what is used, as long as it's consistent it doesn't matter at all. Regardless of personal preference.

I definitely read the thread; did you actually read my last sentence?

I sure hope you did, otherwise my sarcasm is actually relevant.
-Chase

 

[Nermal]

How about "10 000"? IMO, that's more readable than "10000" and shouldn't cause any confusion like "10,000" vs "10.000" could.

I'd prefer that too, but I didn't want to annoy the Americans too much

Officially, "10 000" is how we write it here in NZ too (although it seems that most people don't actually know that).

 

[r_howie]

"10000" would be better, as in some countries "10,000" means "ten".

Well, if I read a text in English my brain would never for a moment consider the comma as a decimal separator. In Italian, instead, comma is the decimal separator.

"10,000" works good enough for me, or "10 000".

 

[dotdotdot]

How about "10 000"? IMO, that's more readable than "10000" and shouldn't cause any confusion like "10,000" vs "10.000" could.

Unless that space have some other special meaning somewhere

This is the "correct" numbers in American English (or... well yeah)

1
10
100
1000 (some write 1,000)
10,000
100,000
1,000,000
10,000,000
100,000,000

So, a comma comes before a set of 3 numbers, from right to left:

13629623 - the number before the comma
13629,623 - the comma BEFORE the last set of 3 numbers
13,629,623 - the commas seperating the 3 sets of numbers

 

[840quadra]

I just post an article and let others play with it.

If people want to edit my work, fine. I live in the USA, so I tend to use what people here call "American" English, even though "America" can relate with two continents and many countries .

 

[Mechcozmo]

"10000" would be better, as in some countries "10,000" means "ten".

Yes, but in the countries that are primarily accessing the forums, they will know the different ways to read numbers, it isn't too hard... I don't have an issue with it, but oh well.

 

[The Muffin Man]

my point is not to place superiority on any kind of english, i believe that are are equally good as long as they are understood.

anyway, on the -ise vs -ize thing:

my argument that -ize is just as proper is that english definitely has latin roots, so the english that deviates more from latin must be one step farther from classic english, right? spanish also derives from latin a LOT, and most english verbs like "finalise/finalize" end with "-izar" in spanish. finalise is finalizar. realise is realizar.

so, -ize appears to be more classic. but im sure the argument can be made that english is NOT latin, and that english is from england, therefore its variety is the best. but -ize MUST be more classic.

 

[mpw]

my point is not to place superiority on any kind of english, i believe that are are equally good as long as they are understood.

anyway, on the -ise vs -ize thing:

my argument that -ize is just as proper is that english definitely has latin roots, so the english that deviates more from latin must be one step farther from classic english, right? spanish also derives from latin a LOT, and most english verbs like "finalise/finalize" end with "-izar" in spanish. finalise is finalizar. realise is realizar.

so, -ize appears to be more classic. but im sure the argument can be made that english is NOT latin, and that english is from england, therefore its variety is the best. but -ize MUST be more classic.

English is a mix of Latin and Germanic, and probably many others thrown in. Part of the beauty of English comes from the fact that it is fluid and can adapt and change unlike other languages that have very stringent rules like Latin and French which a Latin descendant.

 

[BakedBeans]

English is a mix of Latin and Germanic, and probably many others thrown in. Part of the beauty of English comes from the fact that it is fluid and can adapt and change unlike other languages that have very stringent rules like Latin and French which a Latin descendant.

You're pretty much on the money, There are other languages thrown in (As you say).

One thing is for sure, no matter which variety we choose we are assured the we are speaking the worlds true international language and probably the best

 

[superbovine]

"10000" would be better, as in some countries "10,000" means "ten".

When I was in college in the US we had several British professor, and we schooled in the ways of the comma Although, When I studied in Europe the comma in math notation was sorta of weird for me. I always screwed it up.

 

[matticus008]

English is a mix of Latin and Germanic, and probably many others thrown in. Part of the beauty of English comes from the fact that it is fluid and can adapt and change unlike other languages that have very stringent rules like Latin and French which a Latin descendant.

English is no more or less fluid in form than any other language in the world. The fragmentation (and the definition of forms) is largely political. The French academie retains a tight control on the evolution of the language because of tradition and cultural reasons.

English once had a case system, much more complex pronouns, and a variety of other grammatical features that it has elected to discard. Spanish (and there again, the debate over "proper" Spanish) literature written in the 1500s is a challenge to read today, because the language has been simplified in response to various forces. Finnish isn't archaic because it's held onto its 16 cases, it's just evolved to different forces of change.

English has very stringent rules, just like other languages. It's just that culturally, people are less inclined to care about violating those rules. The major changes in English have been driven by fairly large, significant historical events (the Norman conquest, the Protestant revolution, and the colonization of the New World all had huge impacts on English). English's hard and fast rules DO matter (technically, if not culturally) and don't change any faster than other languages. Lexical borrowing is not grammatical change, and changes in spelling are fairly trivial given that English has one of the least consistent orthographies of any language.

Latin itself has not been observed to change only because it's only been practiced academically, and therefore frozen in place by tradition and the nature of its non-use. American English and RP (Commonwealth) English are arguably two entirely separate languages, despite being 99%+ identical. Danish is only a separate language by declaration, not by merit. What that means in this discussion is that "true" English cannot be dictated onto sovereign nations. American English is the true English of the United States; other countries may differ. Canadian English is neither here nor there, but is the true English of Canada. There is no true English of the entire world, and no true "Internet English" that would guide the MR Guides.

 

[mpw]

English is no more or less fluid in form than any other language in the world….
…The French academie retains a tight control on the evolution of the language because of tradition and cultural reasons…
…English once had a case system, much more complex pronouns, and a variety of other grammatical features that it has elected to discard…
…English has very stringent rules, just like other languages. It's just that culturally, people are less inclined to care about violating those rules…
…English's hard and fast rules DO matter (technically, if not culturally) and don't change any faster than other languages…

Most of what you’ve said I don’t disagree with. But it seems you start by disagreeing with my opinion that English is no more fluid than other languages then go on to say that some other language have only been less fluid because the people speaking those languages chose not to change. While English speakers chose to change, or that the languages itself chose to change?

Surely it’s how the language is used that makes the language fluid not the potential to be used in a fluid manner, or all language would be fluid.

 

[wiseguy27]

Over at Wikipedia they use a compromise:

[*] If a given page is written consistently using one kind of English, leave it alone. Don't change consistent Commonwealth usage and spelling to US, or vice versa. It's pointless and only serves to upset people.

Yes, DON'T ANNOY the author(s). After all, everybody can understand US or British/Australian/Canadian/Rest of the world English. Why place too big an emphasis on spelling? The only thing that might annoy people is inconsistency (or really poor spelling and/or grammar). Try to stick to one form and members (the mature ones around) wouldn't complain.

And please, do not use "Internet" or "SMS" English - like "u cud use da ctrl key 2 opn da pop up menu wen cliking da mouze."

 

[matticus008]

Most of what you’ve said I don’t disagree with. But it seems you start by disagreeing with my opinion that English is no more fluid than other languages then go on to say that some other language have only been less fluid because the people speaking those languages chose not to change. While English speakers chose to change, or that the languages itself chose to change?

Surely it’s how the language is used that makes the language fluid not the potential to be used in a fluid manner, or all language would be fluid.

Right. The people choose to change their language (or a more powerful country forces change). I guess my disagreement was purely semantic in nature (the language itself is not more or less open to change [though there have been languages that are structurally limited to changes]). It's the people that change the languages, so the credit goes to English speakers and English-speaking cultures, not the English language. Obviously I've dismissed Sapir-Whorf here, because it's preposterous on the scale they proposed.

Innate potential to change is a variable, it's just that most major languages have similar values for that variable. No major beef, but when being specific, it always helps to be as completely specific as possible.

 

[Peel]

And please, do not use "Internet" or "SMS" English - like "u cud use da ctrl key 2 opn da pop up menu wen cliking da mouze."

Aw, come on... I think everything should be written in 3l173

 

[oober_freak]

India being a commonwealth country, we're taught England's "English" but pretty much every one uses American English. Even in schools, they consider both -ize and -ise.

English is a language that has evolved a lot. I'd not be surprised if it is a lot different 50 years hence.

My suggestion is not to give THAT much attention to spellings. As for the ones who do, you're the right person to teach English in the local school